On this momentous day, the Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja and Jos, the capital of Plateau State, decided the political fates of the president of Nigeria, Alhaji Umar Musa Yar’ Adua, and the governors of Plateau, Mr. Jonah Jang; Yobe State, Alhaji Mamman Ali and Adamawa State, Admiral Murtala Nyako. At the end of it all, only Nyako lost his appeal.

It was the Abuja event that took the cake. Three issues were responsible for this. Number one was the obvious fact that the petitions of the All Nigerian People’s Party (ANPP) presidential candidate, General Muhammadu Buhari, and his peer of the Action Congress (AC), former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, sought to sack Yar’Adua.

There was this pervasive feeling that, given the perceived massive flaws of the April 2007 presidential election, Yar’Adua was likely to be made to return to the polls for a rerun.

Then, a curious thing happened. Just a week to the Court of Appeal’s verdict, Yar’Adua received the name of Justice James Ogebe, the Chairman of the five-man Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.

It was sent to him by the National Judicial Council (NJC) for onward transmission to the Senate for confirmation as one of the newest Justices of the Supreme Court (JSC).

This ruffled the feathers of critics, who pointed out that such a gesture at this point of judgement delivery could compromise Justice Ogebe’s impartiality.

And, perhaps, as a means of declaring himself transparent in whatever verdict his court was to pronounce, Justice Ogebe vacated the seat of Chairman of the Tribunal and excused himself from court on this Super Tuesday. One of his colleagues was given the onerous duty of reading out the 197-minute verdict.

And, for the first time in the history of such watershed judicial events, the major radio and television networks in the country were invited to cover the proceedings live in court. This was a smart move, because it enabled Nigerians to follow word-for-word every reason adduced for reaching a verdict that stopped many who were full of contrary expectations in tracks.

There would have been far more criticism of this verdict had the live transmission not been staged. Most people would have found it difficult to accept the fact that all five Justices sitting on that panel agreed to dismiss the petitions for lack of evidence, without even a single item redeemed in favour of the litigants.

It was a landslide victory for President Yar’Adua, Vice President Goodluck Jonathan and also Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Chairman, Professor Maurice Iwu, whose critics had accused of having conducted the worst election in our political history.

So, Iwu and his staff must be jubilating and thumping one another on the back in congratulations because this verdict appears to have confirmed his rating of the 2008 general election as “free, fair and acceptable”.

And, yet, here were elections that were roundly condemned in this country and beyond, based on which President Yar’Adua, during his inaugural address to the nation, admitted that they were flawed and thus the need for the Uwais Panel on Electoral Reform, which is in place.

The Appeal Court Justices’ main ground for dismissing the petition was lack of evidence or proof on the part of the petitioners. And, from all indications, it will be almost an impossible task to provide enough proof to upturn a presidential poll.

The Justices placed an uphill onus on the petitioners not only to prove that irregularities took place, but also to show that such irregularities were on such a scale as to warrant the cancellation of the poll.

The most intriguing aspect of it was the issue dealing with the alleged involvement of soldiers, policemen and political thugs in snatching ballot papers and shooting to scare voters so as to clear the way for electoral fraud.

This is a rampant occurrence that mars Nigerian elections. The appeal court dismissed this matter on the ground that the unknown soldiers/policemen/thugs were not produced. Even if they were produced, the petitioners would still be asked to prove how their activities would warrant cancellation.

At the end of it all, the impression one got was that the judgement of the Court of Appeal did not, in any way, create the deterrence factor in future presidential polls.

Without deterrence, there is nothing to stop politicians and the electoral body from doing it all over again. Justice Ogebe’s court did not teach anyone the useful lesson that other tribunals have been dishing out – that electoral crimes do not pay.

Let us see what the Supreme Court, led by Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi, will say.